Prohibition won't truly end because religion demands that its minions exercise social control by rationing pleasures (sex) and trying to ban as many competing pleasures as practical.

Religion is the enemy of freedom, and "nice religionists" as a matter of their faith to try to order modern society by the Superstitions of the desert.

They can only think in the context of their fantasy, and that makes them always enemies of personal freedom.

Democracy in the US was a way to deconflict Superstitionists so they didn't go all hacky-stabby as they had for hundreds of years in Europe. It is not a religious invention and as religionists grab for power they will always attack democracy.

Well, yeh, except that prohibition of MJ is already over in Colorado, for all practical intents and purposes. People can and will grow their own, with near complete impunity from State officials.

The beauty of A64 is that amendments to the State Constitution can't be legislated away, only voted away by the people, and that's about as likely as a flyover by a squadron of flying pigs.

There remains some legal wrangling wrt outdoor grows & retail sales, but I suspect that Denver cops, anyway, will make a point of not seeing marijuana plants unless they're beyond obvious, like 12 ft plants sticking up over a 6 ft privacy fence... Even then, as near as I can tell, all they can do is confiscate 'em if the numbers are right.

There ill probably be some interesting wrangling over declared residency vs actually living in that location, too. I'm not sure that officialdom really wants to open that can of worms, given the, uhh, flexibility that affluent "residents" have been granted in that regard.

Grow shops have sprung up like weeds, everywhere, and are doing a brisk business. I must be doing something right at the place where I shop, because they gave me 2 free seeds on my last visit- locally produced feminized Sensi Star. Supposedly really good shit. Only one way to find out, right?

As I think about it, it seems to me that the legislature has left a gaping hole in regulations when it comes to seeds and clones. Seeds aren't psychoactive, so they're not really marijuana per se, just a hemp product, and cuttings not rooted are just... marijuana, where any resident over the age of 21 is allowed to buy & carry an ounce, anywhere...

Well, yeh, except that prohibition of MJ is already over in Colorado, for all practical intents and purposes.

Hardly. While the state legalized, the DEA is still quite able and capable of coming in and raising all kinds of hell, and let's not forget the obvious legal/Constitutional issues legalization acts create. I give it about a year before we see a massive DEA presence in Colorado, over-the-top federal charges, and heavy legal challenges to the relevant laws themselves. Given the attitudes present in today's federal government, Colorado is in for a world of hurt (if you're in the MJ business) in the next few years.

Well, yeh, except that prohibition of MJ is already over in Colorado, for all practical intents and purposes.

Hardly. While the state legalized, the DEA is still quite able and capable of coming in and raising all kinds of hell, and let's not forget the obvious legal/Constitutional issues legalization acts create. I give it about a year before we see a massive DEA presence in Colorado, over-the-top federal charges, and heavy legal challenges to the relevant laws themselves. Given the attitudes present in today's federal government, Colorado is in for a world of hurt (if you're in the MJ business) in the next few years.

Resources? Resources can always be reallocated. These laws are a direct challenge to federal supremacy, and that in itself is going to provoke a response.

Care enough? State legalization laws are a direct middle finger to all the drug warriors out there, and that's pretty much exclusively who staffs the DEA. Nothing gets law enforcement's back up like this kind of challenge, now couple that with what the enforcers see as a moral imperative, and the end result looks pretty ugly to me.

Edit:I should say I'm about as pro-legalization as it comes; I cheered when CO and WA legalized, and I hope that CA will do so soon. It's more that MJ legalization is, by far, the biggest and most importantly, the most publicly supported, pushback by the states against the federal government in a long time. This kind of challenge isn't going to go unanswered.

Resources? Resources can always be reallocated. These laws are a direct challenge to federal supremacy, and that in itself is going to provoke a response.

I'm not sure who you think the supporters of federal supremacy are in all this. The democrats (the traditional federal supremacists) obviously aren't going to circumvent state decriminalization. The republicans might be dumb enough to try it if they get back the whitehouse, but I doubt it. These are measures passed by referendum, they obviously have public support, why throw away any chance of winning that state when you can gain just as much in terms of galvanizing your supporters by yelling about how you hate it, but actually doing nothing?

Resources? Resources can always be reallocated. These laws are a direct challenge to federal supremacy, and that in itself is going to provoke a response.

I'm not sure who you think the supporters of federal supremacy are in all this. The democrats (the traditional federal supremacists) obviously aren't going to circumvent state decriminalization. The republicans might be dumb enough to try it if they get back the whitehouse, but I doubt it. These are measures passed by referendum, they obviously have public support, why throw away any chance of winning that state when you can gain just as much in terms of galvanizing your supporters by yelling about how you hate it, but actually doing nothing?

There's also the issue of finding Colorado juries that will convict. As I understand it, federal juries in Colorado are drawn heavily from the Denver metro area, which voted strongly for legalization.

The Feds have always depended heavily on cooperation from local authorities, and likely want to maintain that wrt other illegal drugs. I'm sure that feeling is mutual. The whole thing raises serious issues as to the ability to detain people who are arrested. Can local authorities even hold federal prisoners who haven't broken state law? Do the Feds have the jail capacity to hold an enormous number of low level offenders, or the staff to prosecute?

The parts of A64 that will stymie federal efforts are the possession & individual cultivation provisions. Possession & production will become so widespread & so diffuse that it'll be unstoppable. Even apartment dwellers can readily indulge themselves with modern autoflowering varieties in a sunny window or under a 250 watt (or larger) HID lamp, fluorescent lights, or newer LED arrays. They're not photoperiod sensitive, and will deliver maybe an oz of high quality bud per plant every 8-10 weeks, given good houseplant grade cultivation. Many are low odor, as well. Just leave the light on for minimum fuss & maximum yield. In the mid to long run, it's a helluva lot cheaper than black market product & avoids unsavory associations, as well.

As U-99 offered, Colorado legalization hasn't changed the lives of non-tokers in any significant way, nor will it. We saw that with MMJ. As time goes on, the willingness of the population to humor anti-MJ warriors will wear very, very thin. That's particularly true in an era where resource allocation is a major issue.

The truth is a funny thing. Kept below a certain threshold of public perception, it can remain suppressed. Once that threshold is crossed, it becomes highly contagious & virulent, particularly when it involves something providing pleasure in a relatively innocuous fashion. That applies as much to MJ as it does to "violent" video games.

Having the resources? It is called asset forfeiture: they take all your money, and take all your stuff to auction off. Policing for profit - getting money is not a problem.

At the federal level, that only applies to organized crime, crime for profit. Non-profit home growers can't be shown to fall into that category. A64 forbids asset forfeiture to the state wrt marijuana.

Asset forfeiture doesn't support law enforcement, anyway, but rather supplements govt funding. It won't even come close.

I give it about a year before we see a massive DEA presence in Colorado, over-the-top federal charges, and heavy legal challenges to the relevant laws themselves

Not a chance. It's a losing battle from the Fed's perspective. Hell, my next door neighbors already have a grow up in their basement. My best friend does as well. Unless you actually believe they're going to simply go door to door, arresting the massive amount of people growing...it's not going to happen.

My best friend works for one of the fastest...growing..commercial producers in the state. They can't buy more ops fast enough. (3 in the last 6 months). They're going to be like the WalMart of weed. The owner and his lawyers are not stupid...he made (hundreds of) millions already in unrelated business ventures...and he seems to be pretty confident about the future of the market.

what happens if/when neighboring asshat states start crying about co/wa weed coming across the border?

i'd love to see it legalized. ky tried to get hemp done and i'm not sure anything came out of that. if any state should do it it's ky since we grow a bunch here too but hey; voters are stupid and this state is still trying to wrap it's head around that it's not 1965.

At the federal level, that only applies to organized crime, crime for profit. Non-profit home growers can't be shown to fall into that category. A64 forbids asset forfeiture to the state wrt marijuana.

Asset forfeiture doesn't support law enforcement, anyway, but rather supplements govt funding. It won't even come close.

I think you are a little naive when it comes to government: they only use the law against really bad people! They promise! No law enforcement agency would ever behave in a way that wasn't completely honorable and beyond reproach and would completely respect the rights and privacy of every individual and the autonomy of states to set their own laws governing drug use!

State law does not trump federal law. This is why most drug raids are conducted as federal raids - the DEA gives 80% of the money to the local force that conducted the raids. Even when state law explicitly says that forfeiture money must go to a general fund or to another department to reduce the moral hazard problem, this is not always the case. Unfortunately I cannot remember where this was (and my google-fu is weak today) but there was at least one jurisdiction where all asset forfeiture funds had to be turned over to other parties (to reduce the moral hazard issue) but the police refused to comply (citing that it was a federal raid, because they got a single representative of a federal agency to show up for a 20% cut, and thus did not need to follow the state law). It went on for years because not enough people wanted to risk going up against the cops.

Even if police respected the people, if the DEA wanted to conduct their own raids, they could do it without local help. While it is unlikely they would pursue individuals growing for their own consumption, there is a major risk they could use it as a weapon against individuals that run afoul of the administration.

The federal government does not respect state law. Medical marijuana is legal under California law, but this does not stop the raids of dispensaries there. What makes you think other states will fare any better?

wasn't it louisiana that had to raise the drinking age to 21 or have federal highway funds taken away?

so this can't happen in CO/WA?

Montana went through it, for sure.

The problem is, they're not really equivalent. There are demonstrable links between younger drinkers and increased highway fatalities.* There are no such studies/links regarding adult use of marijuana, AFAIK. There were also no real organized movements to keep drinking age lower than 21, and very little public involvement one way or the other. It was mostly grandstanding about state's rights by state-level politicians. Colorado voters approved a constitutional amendment...a much higher bar to cross than making kids wait a couple years more to legally drink.

At the federal level, that only applies to organized crime, crime for profit. Non-profit home growers can't be shown to fall into that category. A64 forbids asset forfeiture to the state wrt marijuana.

Asset forfeiture doesn't support law enforcement, anyway, but rather supplements govt funding. It won't even come close.

I think you are a little naive when it comes to government: they only use the law against really bad people! They promise! No law enforcement agency would ever behave in a way that wasn't completely honorable and beyond reproach and would completely respect the rights and privacy of every individual and the autonomy of states to set their own laws governing drug use!

State law does not trump federal law. This is why most drug raids are conducted as federal raids - the DEA gives 80% of the money to the local force that conducted the raids. Even when state law explicitly says that forfeiture money must go to a general fund or to another department to reduce the moral hazard problem, this is not always the case. Unfortunately I cannot remember where this was (and my google-fu is weak today) but there was at least one jurisdiction where all asset forfeiture funds had to be turned over to other parties (to reduce the moral hazard issue) but the police refused to comply (citing that it was a federal raid, because they got a single representative of a federal agency to show up for a 20% cut, and thus did not need to follow the state law). It went on for years because not enough people wanted to risk going up against the cops.

Even if police respected the people, if the DEA wanted to conduct their own raids, they could do it without local help. While it is unlikely they would pursue individuals growing for their own consumption, there is a major risk they could use it as a weapon against individuals that run afoul of the administration.

The federal government does not respect state law. Medical marijuana is legal under California law, but this does not stop the raids of dispensaries there. What makes you think other states will fare any better?

No state forfeiture for persons obeying Colorado law. That's not the case in other states, at all, some of which are notorious for seizure of any sizeable quantity of cash found in auto searches.

Federal law does not, to my knowledge, allow for asset forfeiture in instances where money is not involved. Yeh, sure, they can seize your boat w/ a ton of imported MJ onboard, because the intent to sell is obvious, and because importation is illegal. They can seize your house & your car if it can be shown that it was obtained with tainted money. They can seize your car if it was used for smuggling or transport of saleable quantities.

What you describe as DEA raids involving State LEO's is done under the jurisdiction of a joint task force. The reason that such is possible is that the raided activity is illegal under both state and federal law. You'll notice that no such task forces exist for immigration matters, for example, because no state law exists allowing cooperation, and state officials are not empowered to enforce federal law, but rather state & local statutes.

We've arrived at that point wrt small scale marijuana growing & possession in Colorado. If the Feds want to bust somebody, they have to do it themselves. State LEO's will obviously cooperate wrt black market operations moving significant weight, because that's still illegal in Colorado.

It's that part of A64, the personal growing part, that really throws a monkey wrench into federal enforcement. No other state allows it, other than under MMJ statutes involving exams, registration, re-certification, inspection, record keeping & all the trappings of a controlling bureaucracy. In Colorado, personal growers need do none of that. Just grow in complete anonymity. Stay on the right side of plant limitation numbers just in case. Sell nothing. Hand out nice Christmas & birthday presents to willing & grateful adults. Never leave the house with more than an ounce in possession. That's it.

Your reference to a major risk to Colorado legal home growers running afoul of the Admin is pure conspiracy theory.

At this point, the Feds don't even pursue cases involving MJ seed orders from Holland, Canada, the UK & other places where seeds can be sold as "souvenirs". They just confiscate the seeds,(rarely found) insert a USDA mail interception notice, (ppq form 287), send the package on through sealed up with the dreaded green Customs tape. Some vendors guarantee delivery. Upon receipt of photographic evidence, they re-ship at no charge, and will persist until postal records indicate that delivery has occurred. The origin of those seeds is obviously magical in those countries, with no actual marijuana plants involved in their creation, ever. Couldn't be! Well, other than seeds grown in the US & other MMJ jurisdictions, shipped away for "medical" purposes only to become "souvenirs", often shipped right back to their country of origin. Go figure, huh?

Saying that Denver is "reeling" from a "devastating" report is remarkable, given that virtually nobody cares. The anti-MJ crowd is apparently having a lot of trouble getting over themselves & connecting with the reality of A64.

Maybe it's better that they're still pissing into the wind than turning their attention to other authoritarian issues where they have a chance of winning.

Saying that Denver is "reeling" from a "devastating" report is remarkable, given that virtually nobody cares. The anti-MJ crowd is apparently having a lot of trouble getting over themselves & connecting with the reality of A64.

Maybe it's better that they're still pissing into the wind than turning their attention to other authoritarian issues where they have a chance of winning.

I don't know what it has to do with "the safety of our children and our neighborhoods" but the potential millions in lost tax revenue does sound like a problem.

Saying that Denver is "reeling" from a "devastating" report is remarkable, given that virtually nobody cares. The anti-MJ crowd is apparently having a lot of trouble getting over themselves & connecting with the reality of A64.

Maybe it's better that they're still pissing into the wind than turning their attention to other authoritarian issues where they have a chance of winning.

I don't know what it has to do with "the safety of our children and our neighborhoods" but the potential millions in lost tax revenue does sound like a problem.

I wouldn't be too quick to classify potential as real. What's happened is that the Mayor's office has diverted revenues & funding from enforcement to other areas they see as more important.

If we think about it at all, there's little fiscal point to enforcement if enforcement eats up all the revenues from enforcement in a legal pot environment.

I figure that if the pot shops are doing anything shady, it's laundering money for illegal sales elsewhere via inflated patient counts & sales. They'll gladly pay taxes to accomplish that. Hell, I could get free eighths from several shops in the same day, never buy anything, just for registering with them as my provider. Some of them even share information, so when I register with one I'll get a letter from another urging me to switch to them in return for another free eighth. Meanwhile, all the other places I registered with carry me as their patient, too. It only lasts a year, so they'll all be eager to give me free pot to re-register when the time comes. While technically illegal, the pot shops aren't liable since there's no pertinent database they can reference, and I'm not required to tell them when I switch providers. They'll believe whatever I tell 'em (nudge nudge, wink wink, know what I mean?) It'd be tough to bust me, anyway, since... there's no database beyond the one enumerating MMJ card holders & no money to maintain one, even if there was a will to do so. Cash strapped govt doesn't want to know about that- it'd cut into revenue.

I'm not a MMJ patient, anyway, but I understand the way it works. At this point, why any Colorado toker who can grow their own would bother with that game is beyond me. Well, other than resale & free eighths, but you'd need to get a bunch of them to make up for the exam & registration fees.

I've had people tell me that MMJ is just a scam, which is true to some degree or another. If so, it's a very successful scam, both in what I laid out above & in being the point of the sword for legalization. It also helps a lot of people at the same time.

I don't know if I call it a scam because I'm not sure I could say anyone is being duped, but the whole MJ-as-miracle-cure-for-all-that-ails-you is certainly BS. People just want to get high. Not there's anything wrong with that! I think everyone ought to be allowed to, but if people with cancer and MS get the first crack, that's fair enough too.

I don't know if I call it a scam because I'm not sure I could say anyone is being duped, but the whole MJ-as-miracle-cure-for-all-that-ails-you is certainly BS. People just want to get high. Not there's anything wrong with that! I think everyone ought to be allowed to, but if people with cancer and MS get the first crack, that's fair enough too.

Is it actually being marketed as a cure for anything? Isn't it purely marketed - and prescribed - as a palliative?

I don't know if I call it a scam because I'm not sure I could say anyone is being duped, but the whole MJ-as-miracle-cure-for-all-that-ails-you is certainly BS. People just want to get high. Not there's anything wrong with that! I think everyone ought to be allowed to, but if people with cancer and MS get the first crack, that's fair enough too.

Is it actually being marketed as a cure for anything? Isn't it purely marketed - and prescribed - as a palliative?

There is also some honest research indicating that it can act as a preventative measure & that it inhibits tumor growth. It has shown real benefit wrt some neurological disorders, like MS. It's also useful in the treatment of glaucoma.

That's not my interest, obviously.

Unfortunately, a great deal of the so-called "research" into cannabis has been along the lines of the intelligence gathering in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. The extremely complex chemistry & interaction of various components has been largely left unexplored in the herd mentality of condemnation.

Tokers understand some of that from a subjective POV, experiencing a range of effects from different cultivars, harvest timing, curing methods & even weather variation in outdoor growing regions. There's little science to go along with that.

For a long time scientific research regarding the effects of MJ was artificially stifled. Now the flood gates are opening and we're seeing a lot of preliminary results. Combine them with terrible scientific reporting in the news and you'd think MJ, like alcohol, is the cause and solution to all life's problems. I expect good scientific results to emerge over the next decade or two, with the exact timeframe dependent on how much steam legalization gains.

For a long time scientific research regarding the effects of MJ was artificially stifled. Now the flood gates are opening and we're seeing a lot of preliminary results. Combine them with terrible scientific reporting in the news and you'd think MJ, like alcohol, is the cause and solution to all life's problems. I expect good scientific results to emerge over the next decade or two, with the exact timeframe dependent on how much steam legalization gains.

A Catch 22 thing.No studies to prove anything and you can't get the material to do a study.

I don't know if I call it a scam because I'm not sure I could say anyone is being duped, but the whole MJ-as-miracle-cure-for-all-that-ails-you is certainly BS. People just want to get high. Not there's anything wrong with that! I think everyone ought to be allowed to, but if people with cancer and MS get the first crack, that's fair enough too.

Generally I agree with you but as mentioned above, in terms of the kind of "care" it provides, I (and most of my like-minded friends) have always considered to as being more palliative than anything else. It's a quality of life thing. It can help you eat when the nausea from your cancer treatments (or any sort of nausea, really) are preventing you from doing so. It can help dull muscle pain. It can help digestion. It can regulate your bowel movements. It can make headaches go away. It won't cure your major condition but it will make your everyday far easier to deal with than otherwise.

I'm not going to lie, I smoke the way most people drink. I do it because I prefer the buzz to the kind you get with booze, but I also have a milder (well, compared to a lot of folks) case of Crohn's disease and I would not have coped as well without MMJ. It helped me finally get off cortisoid steroids and helped with dealing with major cramps pre-surgery.

But yeah, it's not going to cure your testicular cancer any day soon. It'll help you get through the day, though.

Speaking of science, the advent of a relatively non-invasive method of determining actual stoned-ness coupled with changes in federal law would be the death knell for MJ prohibition.

Let's say that a pin prick blood test like the one used by diabetics is developed & incorporated into standard UA drug testing procedures as a voluntary adjunct.

People who don't toke wouldn't be required to submit to it, but those who do could demand it, to show that they're not stoned at the time of testing, and the result would override the fact that non psychoactive metabolites exist in their urine.

It'd sure as Hell clear the air as to the actual intent of MJ testing, which is currently the threat of civil forfeiture of your job as a backdoor means of social control & law enforcement.

The Horror! The absolute Horror! Why, evildoing lawbreakers could get high off the job and there wouldn't be a damned thing that repressive employers could legitimately do about it!

I don't think it's even conceptually possible to develop such a test. You're talking about a blood test that determines your state of mind. Nothing currently exists that does anything like that.

Unless you just mean "a more time-sensitive test", so that usage could be pinpointed more closely. It's unclear whether that's feasible, though--someone who got high last night could easily be high the next morning, or maybe not. I don't know if there's anything in their blood that would tell you the difference.

I don't think it's even conceptually possible to develop such a test. You're talking about a blood test that determines your state of mind. Nothing currently exists that does anything like that.

Unless you just mean "a more time-sensitive test", so that usage could be pinpointed more closely. It's unclear whether that's feasible, though--someone who got high last night could easily be high the next morning, or maybe not. I don't know if there's anything in their blood that would tell you the difference.

Not really. Few people understand what marijuana UA tests actually measure, which isn't anything psychoactive at all, but rather non- psychoactive metabolites of THC. Those metabolites tend to linger in the human body for days or even weeks, depending. Blood testing, OTOH, can reveal & measure the presence of psychoactive THC substances in the body. The former only determines if you were stoned in the past, while the latter can determine if you are stoned at the time of testing.

It's the difference between being tested for a hangover vs being tested for actual blood alcohol content. Current marijuana blood testing methods require a large sample, a blood draw, making them impractical & unacceptable for general use by employers.

Authoritarians, of course, like it just the way it is. On or off the job, they've got you by the short hairs.

I really don't understand what they (the feds/DEA) think they get out of this. I mean, they haven't been running around raiding all the MMJ shops in California as far as I know. Are they posturing? If so, to what end?

I really don't understand what they (the feds/DEA) think they get out of this. I mean, they haven't been running around raiding all the MMJ shops in California as far as I know. Are they posturing? If so, to what end?

I really don't understand what they (the feds/DEA) think they get out of this. I mean, they haven't been running around raiding all the MMJ shops in California as far as I know. Are they posturing? If so, to what end?

Yeah they have...

Well when your agency only exists because of the drug war and the drug war is mostly just a war on marijuana in terms of funding and arrest numbers, legalizing marijuana is a direct threat to your agencies continued existence. That and the DEA is so corrupted by the big dollar cocaine and heroin money laundered through the big US banks, they can't very well shift all their resources to that.

SSDD. They do seem to acknowledge that Coloradans, in general, aren't buying it, so they'll just try to sell harder in other locales. They'll spin the Colorado experience in the worst terms they can muster for that purpose.

There's also some around the corner hinting that the Feds may not intervene wrt retail MJ, suitably vague, of course. January 1 isn't very far away, so we'll just have to wait & see how it's played.